DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed November 26, 2024 has been entered.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract exceeds 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5, 7, 9-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 11, “an area” should read “the area”,
Claim 2, line 4, “extract area information” should read “extract the area information”,
Claim 2, lines 9-10, “a plurality of pieces of preset data” should read “the plurality of pieces of preset data”,
Claim 3, lines 6-7, “a plurality of organs and a fetus” should read “the plurality of organs and the fetus”,
Claim 4, lines 3 and 4, “the plurality of classes” should read “the plurality of predetermined classes”,
Claim 5, line 5, “a predetermined values” should read “the predetermined value”,
Claim 5, line 6, “each class” should read “each predetermined class”,
Claim 7, lines 3-4, “the plurality of classes” should read “the plurality of predetermined classes”,
Claim 9, line 3, “a plurality of pieces of preset data”, should read “the plurality of pieces of preset data”,
Claim 10, lines 5-6, “a plurality of organs and a fetus” should read “the plurality of organs and the fetus”,
Claim 11, line 8, “an area” should read “the area”,
Claim 13, line 5, “extracting area information” should read “extracting the area information”,
Claim 13, line 10, “a plurality of pieces of preset data” should read “the plurality of pieces of preset data”,
Claim 14, line 5, “a plurality of organs and a fetus” should read “the plurality of organs and the fetus”,
Claim 15, line 5, “the plurality of classes” should read “the plurality of predetermined classes”,
Claim 16, line 6, “a predetermined values” should read “the predetermined value”,
Claim 16, line 7, “each class” should read “each predetermined class”,
Claim 18, line 3, “the plurality of classes” should read “the plurality of predetermined classes”,
Claim 19, line 2, “a plurality of pieces of preset data”, should read “the plurality of pieces of preset data”,
Claim 20, lines 6-7, “a plurality of organs and a fetus” should read “the plurality of organs and the fetus”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an ultrasound signal transceiving module” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. For the purpose of examination and this office action “an ultrasound signal transceiving module” is being interpreted as a piece of hardware, a piece of software, or a processor for transmitting and receiving ultrasound signals, or equivalent thereof (see pg. 8 and pg. 17 of the present applications specification).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the plurality of object bodies" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim does not previously recite a plurality of object bodies.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the predetermined value corresponding to each of the plurality of classes" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claims do not previously recite obtaining a predetermined value that specifically corresponds to each of the plurality of classes.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the plurality of object bodies" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim does not previously recite a plurality of object bodies.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the predetermined value corresponding to each of the plurality of classes" in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claims do not previously recite obtaining a predetermined value that specifically corresponds to each of the plurality of classes.
Claims dependent upon the rejected claims above, but not directly addressed, are also rejected because they inherit the indefiniteness of the claim(s) they respectively depend upon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Kim et al. (US 20160361043).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (Abstract “ultrasound diagnosis apparatus”. Ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 100 in fig. 1) comprising: an ultrasound signal transceiving module configured to transmit an ultrasound signal to an object and receive an ultrasound echo signal reflected from the object ([0372] and fig. 32 disclose probe 20 and ultrasound transceiver 1100 which are considered the ultrasound signal transceiving module. [0375]-[0377] disclose transmitting and receiving ultrasound signals from an object using the transceiver and probe);
a processor (the electronic circuitry of the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 1000) configured to extract area information that is information about an area in the object occupied by each of the plurality of object bodies included in the object, based on the echo signal received from the ultrasound signal transceiving module ([0135]-[0137] disclose using the received signals to extract information about the position of structures (plurality of object bodies) including the fetal stomach and fetal skin that are included within the image. [0301], [0305] and fig. 26 further disclose segmenting the 3D volume of the object into a plurality of volumes based on the acquired data. [0316] discloses the segmented volumes include internals structures of the object), and generate a plurality of pieces of preset data corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies by changing visibility-related parameters corresponding to an area occupied by each of the plurality of object bodies according to a predetermined value, based on the area information ([0316]-[0317] disclose setting 3D rendering properties (preset data) for each of the plurality of volumes to distinguish the volumes, where the properties are preset in the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus and therefore correspond to a predetermined value based on the internal structure (area information). [0314] further discloses distinguishing the volumes from one another by setting colors (visibility related parameters) for each of the volumes);
a parameter information storage portion configured to store information about the predetermined value and provide the information about the predetermined value to the processor in response to a request by the processor ([0317] discloses “3D rendering properties corresponding to characteristics of each volume may be stored in the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 1000”, which are then provided in response to the segmentation); and
a display configured to receive the plurality of pieces of preset data from the processor and render and output preset three-dimensional volume data of the object based on the plurality of pieces of preset data ([0322]-[0323] disclose the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 1000 displays the rendered 3D volume of the object that includes the 3D rendering properties (preset data) for the volumes).
Regarding claim 11, Kim teaches an operation method of an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus ([0006]-[0008] disclose the invention includes methods for ultrasound imaging. Also see fig. 26), the operating method comprising:
transmitting an ultrasound signal to an object and receiving an ultrasound echo signal reflected from the object ([0372] and fig. 32 disclose probe 20 and ultrasound transceiver 1100. [0375]-[0377] disclose transmitting and receiving ultrasound signals from an object using the probe);
extracting area information that is information about an area in the object occupied by each of the plurality of object bodies included in the object, based on the echo signal ([0135]-[0137] disclose using the received signals to extract information about the position of structures (plurality of object bodies) including the fetal stomach and fetal skin that are included within the image. [0301], [0305] and fig. 26 further disclose segmenting the 3D volume of the object into a plurality of volumes based on the acquired data. [0316] discloses the segmented volumes include internals structures of the object); changing visibility-related parameters corresponding to an area occupied by each of the plurality of object bodies according to a predetermined value based on the area information and generating a plurality of pieces of preset data corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies ([0316]-[0317] disclose setting 3D rendering properties (preset data) for each of the plurality of volumes to distinguish the volumes, where the properties are preset in the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus and therefore correspond to a predetermined value based on the internal structure (area information). [0314] further discloses distinguishing the volumes from one another by setting colors (visibility related parameters) for each of the volumes); and
rendering and outputting preset three-dimensional volume data of the object based on the plurality of pieces of preset data ([0322]-[0323] disclose the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 1000 displays the rendered 3D volume of the object that includes the 3D rendering properties (preset data) for the volumes).
Regarding claim 12, Kim teaches the method of claim 11, as set forth above. Kim further teaches storing information about the predetermined value in a parameter information storage portion included in the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus ([0317] discloses “3D rendering properties corresponding to characteristics of each volume may be stored in the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 1000”).
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 and the method of claim 11, as set forth above. Kim further teaches when the echo signal is received, generate the three-dimensional volume data of the object ([0102] “the ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 1000 may generate 3D volume data with respect to the fetus based on the received ultrasound echo signals”);
extract area information corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies from the three-dimensional volume data of the object, by using a semantic segmentation method ([0305] discloses segmenting the 3D volume of the object into a plurality of volumes. [0236] discloses segmenting the image based on a part, organ or tissue);
perform a classification operation to match each of the plurality of object bodies to any one of a plurality of predetermined classes, based on the extracted area information corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies ([0331] discloses determining the tissue corresponding to each of the volumes as being one of a bone, organ dermis, and epidermis of the fetus (predetermined classes)); and
generate a plurality of pieces of preset data corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies ([0316]-[0317] disclose setting 3D rendering properties (preset data) for each of the plurality of volumes to distinguish the volumes. [0236] discloses selecting a color (preset data) for each of the segmented regions. Also see [0332]).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 2 and the method of claim 13, as set forth above. Kim further teaches the plurality of predetermined classes correspond to any one of a plurality of organs included in a human body or a fetus ([0331] discloses the predetermined classes are one of a bone, organ dermis, and epidermis of the fetus), and
the processor comprises a class information storage portion comprising information about the plurality of predetermined classes and information about a plurality of organs and a fetus corresponding to each of the plurality of predetermined classes ([0317] discloses storing characteristics related to each of the volumes which correspond to the plurality of predetermined classes).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 2 and the method of claim 12, as set forth above. Kim further teaches the parameter information storage portion comprises information about the plurality of classes and information about the predetermined value corresponding to each of the plurality of classes ([0317] discloses storing characteristics related to each of the volumes which correspond to the plurality of predetermined classes and storing the 3D rendering properties, where the properties correspond to the predetermined value for teach class).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 2 and the method of claim 13, as set forth above. Kim further teaches the visibility-related parameters comprise at least any one of color, opacity, and texture (claim 2 discloses the 3D rendering properties comprise at least opacity and color), and
the parameter information storage portion is further configured to store information about a predetermined value corresponding to each of the visibility-related parameters for each class ([0345]-[0346] and [0352] disclose having a user select an opacity or color from a user interface and display the opacity or color on the 3D volume, therefore the predetermined values corresponding to each of the possible opacities and colors to be selected is stored within the apparatus).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 2 and the method of claim 16, as set forth above. Kim further teaches a user interface configured to change the visibility-related parameters ([0345]-[0346] disclose a user interface that includes a user input for selecting an opacity or color),
the user interface comprises at least any one of a color adjustment portion, an opacity adjustment portion, and a texture adjustment portion ([0345]-[0346] disclose a user interface that includes a user input for selecting an opacity or color), and when changes to the visibility-related parameters are input through the user interface, the processor is further configured to change visibility-related parameters for pieces of preset data corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies according to the changes and provided pieces of changed data to the display ([0352] discloses in response to the opacity or color being set the display applies the opacity or color to the displayed 3D volume. [0332] discloses displaying each of the tissues in different colors).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 6 and the method of claim 17, as set forth above. Kim further teaches a class selection portion configured to select any one of the plurality of classes ([0318] discloses the apparatus 100 includes a portion where the user can preset the 3D rendering properties applies to specific internal structures), wherein, when changes to the visibility-related parameters are input through the user interface, the processor is further configured to change visibility-related parameters included in pieces of preset data of the plurality of object bodies corresponding to a class selected by the class selection portion among the plurality of object bodies according to a user's input ([0318] discloses the user presets the 3D rendering properties for the internal structures, such that they are set to be rendered as specific colors. Also see [0332]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 6, as set forth above. Kim further teaches the display is further configured to, when receiving the pieces of changed data from the processor, render and output the three-dimensional volume data of the object changed based on the changed data ([0352] discloses in response to the opacity or color being set the display applies the opacity or color to the displayed 3D volume. [0332] discloses displaying each of the tissues in different colors).
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 6, as set forth above. Kim further teaches the processor further comprises a data storage portion configured to store a plurality of pieces of preset data corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies ([0317] discloses storing characteristics related to each of the volumes), and
when receiving the changes from the user interface, is further configured to receive the plurality of preset data from the data storage portion and change visibility-related parameters included in the plurality of pieces of preset data received from the data storage portion, according to the changes ([0352] discloses in response to the opacity or color being set the display applies the opacity or color to the displayed 3D volume, thereby changing the color of the plurality of object bodies previously stored. [0332] discloses displaying each of the tissues in different colors).
Regarding claim 19, Kim teaches the method of claim 11, as set forth above. Kim further teaches storing a plurality of pieces of preset data corresponding to each of the plurality of object bodies in a data storage portion included in the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus ([0317] discloses storing characteristics related to each of the volumes).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 3 and the method of claim 14, as set forth above. Kim further teaches the processor is further configured to match each of the plurality of object bodies to any one of the plurality of predetermined classes, based on the information about the plurality of predetermined classes and the information about a plurality of organs and a fetus corresponding to each of the plurality of predetermined classes included in the class information storage portion ([0331] discloses determining the tissue corresponding to each of the volumes as being one of a bone, organ dermis, and epidermis of the fetus (predetermined classes). [0134] further discloses determining the point (volume) as being one of a predetermined class based on the intensity value (information) of the point).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW BEGEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Raymond can be reached at 5712701790. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW W BEGEMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights